If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Reds sign Wilson

I can't see how anyone is surprised with this signing. I'm just happy we got one pitcher. We need more and Wilson being our #1 really sucks, but now we only need to get 2 more starters instead of 3! If we could get a semi-ace I could live with this!

Re: Reds sign Wilson

The option is club, meaning, adios no matter what happens to Wilson.

This move is about what was thought. The contract isn't that bad, especially if you think Paul is going to have a late career surge, maybe even a bargain. But it is still a stopgap type move and "mentor" role to young pitchers over the next 2 seasons.

Re: Reds sign Wilson

I don't necessarily think it's the end of the world. LaRue and Valentin both signed for cheaper than I thought/was realistically hoping. Wilson cost a little more. Framed against Lidle's $6.3/2yrs it's not great, but Wilson is a distinct half-step or so better than Cory and he comes way cheaper than the $22.5MM for three years that Kris Benson, who's only two years younger, got from the Mets. Wilson was better than Benson in 2004.

Re: Reds sign Wilson

Originally Posted by letsgojunior

$8.2 M?!?!?!?

Pass the bucket M2.

Easy everyone, its 2 years at 7.3 mil total, plus the 800+k buyout makes the deal a guaranteed $8.15M. To me, it seems like both parties should be happy here. The Reds get their starter for little over the 3.5 mil a year they originally offered, and Paul gets his guaranteed 8M. If Paul ends up staying exactly the same pitcher, the Reds have wasted money in worse ways. If he improves, then it is money well spent. If he falls, well lets just say I hope we don't have to consider this.

The bright side is it was only a marginal raise form last year, where he pitched above expectations. I say good enough.

Re: Reds sign Wilson

Originally Posted by Boss-Hog

It's 100% on O'Brien for spending the money that is available to him on signings like Paul Wilson.

Are you saying we shouldn't have signed Wilson at all? Now, if we could sign a guy like Clement if we didn't sign Wilson at all, then I would agree. My point was, signing Wilson for .. what? 2 Million cheaper? 2.5 Cheaper? That isn't going to affect signing anyone important, atleast not in my opinion. I'm sure if a top of the line guy said I want 2.5 more, they would go for it. But again, it comes back to should he have signed Wilson at all? Could we compete with the big teams for a better option?

Re: Reds sign Wilson

Originally Posted by DoogMinAmo

Easy everyone, its 2 years at 7.3 mil total, plus the 800+k buyout makes the deal a guaranteed $8.15M. To me, it seems like both parties should be happy here. The Reds get their starter for little over the 3.5 mil a year they originally offered, and Paul gets his guaranteed 8M. If Paul ends up staying exactly the same pitcher, the Reds have wasted money in worse ways. If he improves, then it is money well spent. If he falls, well lets just say I hope we don't have to consider this.

The bright side is it was only a marginal raise form last year, where he pitched above expectations. I say good enough.

I'm sorry, but it's not good enough for me. First of all, we're operating on a low payroll ($45 M last year), that is already extremely top heavy (think Jr-Casey-Graves). It would be one thing if we already had one or two very good young pitchers who could anchor the rotation, and we needed a solid #3-4 starter to win 10-12 games and have an ERA around 4. Except that we don't have any great young pitchers, and we're signing Wilson with the expectation that he'll anchor the staff. Second of all, the price tag implies that even if Wilson doesn't pitch incredibly well, he'll at least be an innings eater. That is not the case. He has yet to eclipse 200 IP in his time with the Reds, or even in his ENTIRE CAREER for that matter. Third, this is a guy who is pretty injury prone, and we've already got a roster replete with guys who are injury prone. He's missed time each of the last two seasons, and was a top prospect before he blew out his arm. Fourth, what direction does this signing indicate the club is going in? It seems to me that we're going in about seven directions at once. Handing the SS reins over to Lopez/Machado, and trying Kearns out at 3B implies that we're building for the future. Signing Wilson for big bucks indicates we want to win right now. What exactly are we doing?

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball